Atheists who converted to a theistic religion, what motivated

The fear of death and eternal non-existense became too unbearable and I caved in.

>>34087049
The thing is, you don't experience non-existence, there is nothing to fear about it. You will only ever experience life and then you will simply cease to be. What's the point of existing forever anyway? It would get boring very quickly, and then you'd be praying for non-existence

I went from atheism to "I don't know shit".

I don't necessarily believe in a specific god, but now I believe anything is possible, from us just being bacteria on a rock with no purpose, to perhaps their being some sort of divine explanation for it all.

>>34087122
Do you believe a god exists? If you answer anything except 'yes' you're an atheist.

I don't think it's possible to go from atheism to theism, not unless your atheism was extremely shallow to begin with. Belief (or lack thereof) isn't something you can flip like a switch.

>>34087145
You can have an experience or be exposed to information which convinces you.

I'm an atheist but if I came across rational justification of the existence of a god, I'd officially be a theist. That's the nature of a skeptic.

>>34087137


Sure, but I feel its important to distinguish myself as someone who simply does not know as opposed being certain there is no god.

>>34087193
That's agnostic.

>>34086985
I used to be an egdelord atheist, however, once I grew up I realized that the existence of a being higher than our understanding is perfectly possible. I studied theoretical physics a lot due to my want to understand how a god could exist and concluded that if beings are able to exist in higher dimensions then a god could exist.

I still think all religion is man-made bullshit however.

>>34087049

lol you didn't exist for billions of years. why be afraid? you've already experienced it

>>34087193
Atheism isn't a claim that there no god, it's a rejection of the claim that there is a god.

not true =/= false

1. there is a god
2. there is no god

Two seperate claims. Atheism deal with the first one.

>>34087208
gnosticim refers to knowledge, theism refers to belief. What being described is more accurately described as agnostic atheist i.e.

>I don't *believe* in a god and
>I don't *know* whether there's a god or not.

Began to actually pray for some things and every single time that shit happened against all odds, and only when praying in a christian style, I've tried multiple

I may be simple minded but thats enough for me

Because through careful consideration and thought i found the cosmic force that can not be seen or heard or felt. All life is based on numbers,chance and will. Our lives run on algorithms similar to machines. And through infinite possibility and infinite chance it all points to there being an outside force. Now,wether this outside force has a name or form we could possibly see is up to questionable circumstance. Because of this infinite chance and number system,the way we find "it" can very well be impossible. For all i know the plane of exsistance in ith it resides doesnt run on the same algorithm we do. There set of numbers does not compute with ours. It is as simple as that. And i am ok with that. I don't want to meet the end/begining now. That all being said,the only logical system i can put myself to is the spirituality that is life. I have a nameless god,and my only sin is not to live and not be free. That is why i am no longer athiest.

>>34086985
I used to be an atheist but then I was high as shit and felt like God was real so now I believe in him

File: kenny1.png (149KB, 296x310px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 296x310px

>>34087229
>you existed before you existed

>>34087258
This guy gets it. The burden of proof is always on the person making the claim. Atheism is not making a claim that God/s doesn't exist, it's a response to those theists who say God/s exist.

Theist: God exists!
Atheist: There's no evidence to support this!

I realized that existence is a paradox and therefore something greater must exist.

>>34087228
>once I grew up I realized that the existence of a being higher than our understanding is perfectly possible.

I came to the same conclusion, but that's not definitive proof of an absolute god, only that its not a stretch that something out there could be much more powerful and wise compared to man. Even we appear to be gods if you compare us to lower lifeforms.

>>34087270
This is so retarded and unintelligible. Just for fun I'll try untangling it.

>All life is based on numbers,chance and will
No black swans fallacy. How do you know this? Have you studied all life forms? Not all life has will.

>And through infinite possibility and infinite chance
How did you determine infinite possibility?

> it all points to there being an outside force
what points to there being an outside force? You can actully ignore the rest if you choose, this is the most important question.

>

I've always believed in "God". Was raised a catholic, believed in the catholic God until I was about 13.

Funny enough, Like santa claus, I just came to the conclusion that the church didn't really make sense and since I read the old and new testament, I never really sided with the Divine father of the scriptures. He did and bestowed upon humanity a lot of good, but he was a dictator. Nobody should be forced belief upon.

And still I never was an atheist per se. I became "Atheist" waaaay before the fedora meme, but at risk of seeming like a /x/fag roleplayer, I always "felt" an higher presence, some sort of universal connection in our piving energy. Kind if like the force. Not exactly a "being", but a presence, an energy, a living force radiating from life on our planet and perhaps the cosmos.

It's the church I never really sided with. Even if a God exists, I refuse to believe that a church of mere humans is speaking in his stead. It's obvious that the churches of the world are self serving and deceitful. No fair God would ask of his children to erect idols of him everywhere, to pray out loyd and to aggressively convert others. No fair God would send his good children to eternal punishment because of an original sin.

So I never really stopoed believing, It's just that I stopoed trusting humans to define a being that apparentky transcend our understanding.

>>34087355
>Even we appear to be gods if you compare us to lower lifeforms.

Exactly! Using this logic it's easy to see how our comprehension is limited. It would be arrogant of us to assume our limited minds could even recognize a greater being, after all, do you think an ant knows what a human is?

Was an atheist. Converted to Christianity because existential crisis blah blah. Joined a church and was baptized. I am an atheist again now, though.

>>34086985

Still an atheist, but I'm in the closet, so-to-speak. I tell everyone that I'm a Christian and am considering going to Church.

Atheism makes sense to me, personally, but most people are way to irresponsible to handle the implications. The Church, for whatever faults it had, served as a cultural and moral regulatory agency throughout most of Western Civilization. A sort of soft alternative to rigid government regulation.

Once the Church waned in power, moral and cultural standards started declining. This could have been offset, had we had a functional cultural elite, but we don't and haven't for a while.

Take something like sexual morality for example. One can make a perfectly secular case for abstinence until marriage, but people don't listen. Hellfire and brimstone makes for a far more compelling case to some people than statistics and peer-reviewed studies do.

Plus, I met a qt at school who was a Christian. Nothing happened with her, but I realized that the only hope I had for meeting women who weren't used goods was through the Church.

>>34087359
1. Give me one animal with a brain capacity to think that has no free will. Name one. Just one.

2. It is inifinite becuase there is not set value of said chane to stop. Life is not a game someone can manipulate like a card game.

3. There is an outside force because nothing can not come from nothing. You will not get a 5 from a 0 in a set. But you can get a 5 from a 0.0000001 in a set. Even human biology can exsplain it. All living living cells have come from a basic starting point that has came from outer space. This is true,there are meteors that have done so. And the chance that the meteor had of hitting earth is to controled by infinite chance. We as people are here becuase of a chance. A statistic. Now i can't tell you wether it is true or not Becuase this my reasoning that i have thought of but i can tell you religion has done more for mankind than what atheism has done. Even religion being an adversary has done more for humanity than atheism. It is a system that works and we should not fix what is not broken.

>>34087049

You will exist again. The universe just like numbers are infinite and thus you reappearing will happen again.

>>34087177

Read Thomas Aquinas. Though he did not make me Catholic or Christian per say, it opened the doors to the belief in an intelligent creator

>>34087532
1. you said life, not "animal with brain capacity". Your statement is also begging the question.

2. Life can be manipulated. The kind of life that can exist is entirely dependent on the kind of environments available.

3. SO much crap that deepak chopra would be proud.

>There is an outside force because nothing can not come from nothing

how did you determine this? And where did that outside force come from then?

>All living living cells have come from a basic starting point that has came from outer space. This is true,there are meteors that have done so. And the chance that the meteor had of hitting earth is to controled by infinite chance. We as people are here becuase of a chance. A statistic.

What does this ave to do with a god?

>Even religion being an adversary has done more for humanity than atheism. It is a system that works and we should not fix what is not broken.
Atheism isnt here to do anything, it's simply asking for the evidence of a god belief. No valid evidence has yet to be presented. And religion is disasterously broken. We've progressed in spite of it, not because of it.

Do me a favor, look at the top five religous countries in the world and the top 5 atheistic countries in the world and also compare the GDPs, quality of life and living standards of those countries. If religion is so great why don't you move to bangladesh?

>>34086985
>Atheists who converted to a theistic religion, what motivated your conversion?

pure virgin qts

>>34086985
>hardcore atheist
>took acid at 25
>"Hmm...there might be something to this thing called life."
>took mushrooms about a week later
>"Hmm...I feel weirdly connected to something."
>took acid again
>"Hmm...I feel weirdly connected to everything."
>took ecstasy
>"Hmm...am I God?"
>vaped DMT
>"Holy shit I just saw where we go when we die!"

Religion needs to be banned.
Science +Spirituality = Enlightenment

>>34087671
hmm... my brain is currently addled by drugs causing it to perceive things in a completely bizarre and incorrect way... looks like now is the best time to derive meaning that i will live by for the rest of the life

>>34087671
What would you define spirituality as?

>>34087498
You make me sick. Seriously

>>34087498
>Plus, I met a qt at school who was a Christian. Nothing happened with her, but I realized that the only hope I had for meeting women who weren't used goods was through the Church.
I'm a Christian and this is true for me when I tried looking elsewhere. Never knew how good I had it.

>>34086985
Fuck niggers, that's why. The holohoax never happened by the way.

>>34087941
catholic girls who go to college are the best. First time seperated from god and their parents. All that sexual repressions comes out... right on my dick

>>34087941

Sorry anon, but there's really no other alternative.

At least I'm better at being a Christian than most other Christians these days.

>>34087338
How did something greater exist then

>>34087364
>No fair God would

What makes you assume that if there is a god he has to be fair

What if he's completely unfair

File: IMG_0416.jpg (43KB, 480x360px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 480x360px

>>34087111
>whats the point of existing forever anyways? It would get boring very quickly,...

No. Fuck you.

>>34088217
Churches typically present their respective gods as fair, at least Christian ones certainly do, then when the god does something 100% clearly unfair, it's "god works in mysterious ways" time.

>>34088362
Yeah because churches are usually if not always anti-intellectual retards.

Forget about churches anon.

If you are willing to entertain the notion of a god, then you should consider the possibility that he is, in fact, completely unfair and makes no attempt to hide it.

I don't even believe in god myself but it's something to think about if you do.

>>34088444
Well yes, I was just talking about the post you were replying to, he specifically had a problem with the Christian church and its take on a god.

>>34088506
I see your point, but even then, being unfair does not disprove the Christian god's exitence. Suppose he is real and totally unfair and there is nothing you can do about it. Churches can lie and pretend he's fair but that's them.

Maybe god could have completely arbitrary and insane rules that he doesn't even tell us about. Maybe anyone who drives a blue car will be sent to hell. It's completely unfair, but he's god, so who's going to stop him

My point is unfairness doesn't prove or disprove anything, and I prefer to separate from what the church says and think about it myself

>>34087049
But how do you make yourself believe in something you dismissed as folk tales with no evidence your whole life? How do you bluepill yourself so that it actually has a psychological benefit?

>>34087937
That's the $1m question. Everybody wants to talk "spirituality", nobody can ever define it. It's a weasel word that means nothing.

File: 0142_-_NPrUBRH.png (203KB, 1144x1248px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 1144x1248px

>>34088983
poor reasoning

File: 1482847910323.jpg (51KB, 400x323px) Image search: [Google]

51KB, 400x323px

>>34089381
But how

You can't just make yourself believe something just because you want it to be true.

If somebody points a gun in your face and threatens to kill you, you might want to believe that it's not really happening. But that doesn't mean you actually believe it's not happening. It's right there in front of you and you know it's happening whether you like it or not.

>>34089437
I'm not that bloke, I was explaining what usually happens. People fall victim to appeals to emotion and most people don't understand rational argument, reason and evidence (beyond basic intuition) hence they are taken in by persuasive religious arguments. There's a reason why religions like christianity are still around today. They've evolved, been refined and are pretty much like a thought virus that's really, really hard to eradicate because it's become so good at what it does. Religion is like the herpes of the mind.

>>34089486
Australians are disgusting.

>>34087498

The problem with statistics is that they can very easily be taken out of context by people who don't have the competence to understand them. Also anyone with enough influence and money can make stats say whatever they want. Case in point, suppose I use the world stats for incarceration per nation. One could easily draw the conclusion that because the US are amongst the top countries incarcerating people that Americans are more likely to commit crime and it could make sense, but it could very well be because the legal system in the US operates in a more totalitarian and severe way compared to, say, my country, which has a fairly low rate of incarceration and criminality which could lead you to believe that my country is peaceful, but the truth is that the system is extremely lenient on top of being corrupted, whi h means criminals are more likely to get away with their crime. stats iften overlook the big picture and how other details might connect.

Also because there is an extremely heavy bias against women and libertarian views on sexuality on r9k, I am far more likely to question the conclusions you guys draw. Now I do agree on one thing: We live in an hyper sexualised society which glorifies sexual freedom to a ridiculous and disgusting degree and it does create so many problems since nobody wants to commit, fall in love and even in a relationship, people in general keep an open space in their mind just in case something better comes along so when adversity in their couple rise, instead of working through the hardship, they leave. This is an inherent problem of our far too left centric society. I consider myself more of a leftist, but too much freedom kills freedom.

Now about sex itself, it's foolish to consider a non virgin person to be usex goods. Whatever your moral frame, sex is natural and you will never prevent people from having casual sex.

>>34086985

I realized there is no rational basis for a human life. We have reason but there is no strictly logical reason to do or not do anything. We have to have irrational axioms to make a full human life.

Those thoughts + religious experiences and reading the early Christian writers led me back to the religion my ancestors have been practicing for 1500 years.

I'm completely aware that it's "irrational", but so is sitting around in your underwear posting on 4chan all day, and this is much more fulfilling. There truly is a religious side to the human mind and the human experience that atheists cut themselves off from.

>>34090156
>There truly is a religious side to the human mind and the human experience that atheists cut themselves off from

Study astrophysics or look through a telescope and tell me if you don't have a "religious" experience. In fact, listen to some great music and tell me if you don't have a religious experience. Religion isn't the only way to get the experience you're talking about.

>>34088676
If there is a god that is like the Christian god, but it's unfair, then it's not the Christian god. They make a point of calling it fair everywhere all the time and it's a defining feature.

>>34091146
>fair
>omnibenevolent

You do realise that being benevolent is a suspension of fair justice? Also:

>fair
>infinite punishment

pick one

>>34087111

>What's the point of existing forever anyway? It would get boring very quickly...

Boredom is caused by chemical reactions occurring in the brain.

If the chemical and energy balances in the brain are not of such configuration as to create boredom, then boredom is physically impossible.

>>34091185

Free will is incoherent, so retributive justice is a flawed concept.

Determinism and indeterminism are the only two possibilities. Both preclude free will.

>>34091185
That's just the Christians being as stupid as they always are, their shit is obviously self-contradictory. The fundamental message that most people preach is "lead a good life [by our standards] -> go to heaven, or at least not burn in hell for all eternity", which is presumably meant to describe fairness, hence I went with that.

To begin with, the Christian god is just impossible and complete nonsense on many levels, there's not much of a point in picking it apart

File: Schermopname (6).png (451KB, 462x613px) Image search: [Google]

451KB, 462x613px

I'm an agnostic former atheist who memes some Discordianism on the side.

From catholic to atheist to some vague Buddhism.

I was always interested in Buddhism, and when I actually started looking into the Buddha and the four truths it got me thinking.

Meditation is good for anxiety too.

>>34087572
Except it won't actually be me, it'll just be somebody exactly like me. I'll still be dead.

File: 1370963033859.jpg (470KB, 1494x1662px) Image search: [Google]

470KB, 1494x1662px

>>34091377
>thinks atheism and agnosticism are mutually exclusive

>>34091463
Let me explain, I used to be a gnostic atheist and now I'm a pure agnostic.

Fakesagan/thesmoothterrorist/thefluffykittenist, a z list youtuber from the "atheist community" supposedly converted to orthodox christianity. He made several videos discussing it. The channel they were originally posted on has been deleted, but you may find them mirrored here:

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCqw7d9SwTPfyH2oBXBprTLw/videos

>>34086985
Take a look on the Paschal Wager. Oregano

>>34091491
So you're still an atheist?

>>34091599
I'm neither inclined to believe there is (a) god(dess) nor am I inclined to believe there isn't.

>>34091595
If your only reason for converting to a random religion, especially Christianity, is that, then chances are it's not going to work out all that well. While you presumably lead a good life, you do it for clearly impure reasons, expecting a reward. Not that this isn't true for the vast majority of Christians.

File: cathfam.jpg (150KB, 640x445px) Image search: [Google]

150KB, 640x445px

>>34086985
I was studying Logic and kept running into the conclusion that morality must be objective.
Had a student ask the prof to 'shoot down' the Ontological Argument and the prof pointed out, with proof, that the Ontological Argument and the Quinque Viae are logically sound.
Catholic university so I was required to take 2 theology classes. The first one was straightforward and made me realize I didn't actually know anything about the theology of Catholicism.
Second one was an introduction to Thomism; a system that in consistent and bridges the Is/Ought Gap.
I started conversion within a few months and have been Catholic ever since

>>34091630
It's an either/or scenario. You either have the belief or you don't

>>34091630
Then you're an atheist. See >>34087258

>>34091211
then so is happiness or pleasure

>>34091688
>is/isn't
>not a huge fnord
Fuck off.

>>34091700
I am not inclined to believing in a god as much as I am inclined. I neither reject the claim of a universe with god nor do I reject the claim of a universe without god.

>>34091683
>asking a professor at a catholic university to shoot down catholic arguments
>"wow, the prof said they legit, no need to shoot 'em down, the scales have fallen off my eyes"

>>34086985
Because Christian God is the only thing that makes any sense if you approach life with a positive attitude. There is no real morality without a higher power to which we are responsible to. So an atheist (if he wanted his beliefs to match his actions) would have to be completely amoral and probably kill himself because life is suffering. So such beliefs in fact make no sense because you're thinking one thing and living another.

Christianity may at first seem far fetched, especially if you grew up in our society, because it demands so much from a person, but it's objectively the only thing that makes sense and actually gives you a good thing to strive for. It actually makes you stronger in this life also. It's the Truth.

>>34091839
He was an atheist, actually
>Thinking all profs at a Catholic university have to be Catholic
My third Theology class was taught by a Rabbi
>Mentioned he showed the proofs
So, how many classes in Logic have you taken?

>>34091768
>I neither reject the claim of a universe with god nor do I reject the claim of a universe without god.
So you accept that there is a god and that there isn't?

Please read: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Law_of_thought#The_three_traditional_laws

>>34087897
>incorrect
Um, are you or are you not a "child" of the Big Bang? You're everything experiencing itself as "the other"

Used to be an atheist but now I'm pretty sure that there is some form of cosmic ego.

>>34092005
What makes you think so.

Original questioning time.

>>34086985
The degeneracy of the current generation
The anti-christian propaganda
And I simply feel like it.Plus it doesn't hurt either.

>>34092018
Mostly drugs. I'm not too certain about anything, but I think Idealism is the more logical choice. I read the book Brief Peeks Beyond and it sounded pretty convincing.

>>34091958
I accept neither. Now that I saw my post I could have worded what better. God may exist and he may not. I am not knowledgeable enough to make a claim either way.

>>34087327

Literal meme statement.

You are angry at the world I think.

>>34092168
Then you're atheist. As long as you don't accept the claim "god exists" then you're atheist.

> I am not knowledgeable enough to make a claim either way.
then you're agnostic atheist

File: p4.jpg (37KB, 960x544px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 960x544px

>>34086985
Alan Watts "The Book" helped a lot

"When children ask me those fundamental metaphysical questions which come so readily to their minds: "Where did the world come from?" "Why did God make the world?" "Where was I before I was born?" "Where do people go when they die?" Again and again I have found that they seem to be satisfied with a simple and very ancient story, which goes something like this:
There was never a time when the world began, because it goes round and round like a circle, and there is no place on a circle where it begins. Look at my watch, which tells the time; it goes round, and so the world repeats itself again and again. But just as the hour-hand of the watch goes up to twelve and down to six, so, too, there is day and night, waking and sleeping, living and dying, summer and winter. You can't have any one of these without the other, because you wouldn't be able to know what black is unless you had seen it side-by-side with white, or white unless side-by-side with black.
In the same way, there are times when the world is, and times when it isn't, for if the world went on and on without rest for ever and ever, it would get horribly tired of itself. It comes and it goes. Now you see it; now you don't. So because it doesn't get tired of itself, it always comes back again after it disappears. It's like your breath: it goes in and out, in and out, and if you try to hold it in all the time you feel terrible. It's also like the game of hide-and-seek, because it's always fun to find new ways of hiding, and to seek for someone who doesn't always hide in the same place."

cont.

>>34092186
Not that dude but it would help if you pointed out what's wrong instead of memeing because he literally just gave the definion of what an atheist is.

File: STAGE2.jpg (1007KB, 1280x768px) Image search: [Google]

1007KB, 1280x768px

>>34092279

"God also likes to play hide-and-seek, but because there is nothing outside God, he has no one but himself to play with. But he gets over this difficulty by pretending that he is not himself. This is his way of hiding from himself. He pretends that he is you and I and all the people in the world, all the animals, all the plants, all the rocks, and all the stars. In this way he has strange and wonderful adventures, some of which are terrible and frightening. But these are just like bad dreams, for when he wakes up they will disappear.
Now when God plays hide and pretends that he is you and I, he does it so well that it takes him a long time to remember where and how he hid himself. But that's the whole fun of it-just what he wanted to do.
He doesn't want to find himself too quickly, for that would spoil the game. That is why it is so difficult for you and me to find out that we are God in disguise, pretending not to be himself. But when the game has gone on long enough, all of us will wake up, stop pretending, and remember that we are all one single Self-the God who is all that there is and who lives for ever and ever.
Of course, you must remember that God isn't shaped like a person. People have skins and there is always something outside our skins. If there weren't, we wouldn't know the difference between what is inside and outside our bodies. But God has no skin and no shape because there isn't any outside to him."

File: 2e60c941-671b-4aa2-9535-e727796841f4.jpg (54KB, 630x354px) Image search: [Google]

54KB, 630x354px

>>34092308

"The inside and the outside of God are the same. And though I have been talking about God as 'he' and not 'she,' God isn't a man or a woman. I didn't say 'it' because we usually say 'it' for things that aren't alive. "God is the Self of the world, but you can't see God for the same reason that, without a mirror, you can't see your own eyes, and you certainly can't bite your own teeth or look inside your head. Your self is that cleverly hidden because it is God hiding.
You may ask why God sometimes hides in the form of horrible people, or pretends to be people who suffer great disease and pain. Remember, first, that he isn't really doing this to anyone but himself. Remember, too, that in almost all the stories you enjoy there have to be bad people as well as good people, for the thrill of the tale is to find out how the good people will get the better of the bad. It's the same as when we play cards. At the beginning of the game we shuffle them all into a mess, which is like the bad things in the world, but the point of the game is to put the mess into good order, and the one who does it best is the winner. Then we shuffle the cards once more and play again, and so it goes with the world."

hope that helps illuminate things for you

>>34091952
None in fact, but you clearly should've taken some more and take your professor with you because these arguments are all potato-tier. The ontological argument is great if you are the sort of faggot that uses "god" in the vaguest way possible, then when the opposition concedes that yes, in the vaguest way possible you may be right, you go "HA! CHRISTIANITY DOES IT AGAIN!". The Quinque Viae are all flat-out stupid. Sure they couldn't possibly know a thousand years ago what time is, how thermodynamics or how evolution work, though if he hadn't been retarded he probably could've figured out why the argument of degree is stupid, but now we certainly do know enough about these things to give good answers to the questions that were back then handwaved with >lel it's god

>>34092278
No because an agnostic atheist doesn't believe in god but claims the existence of a god is (currently) unknowable.

File: photo.jpg (132KB, 900x900px) Image search: [Google]

132KB, 900x900px

TempleOS
www.templeOS.org

>>34092335
Pantheism is the only logical way to go desu senpai.

>>34092358
1. there is a god
2. there is no god

Atheism doesn't accept the first claim and has nothing to do with the second claim.

>>34092168
>I accept neither
You're an atheist.

>I am not knowledgeable enough to make a claim either way
that describes agnosticism

You're an agnostic atheist. I think the confusion lies in the fact that on the first statement:

1. there is a god,

you either accept the claim or you don't accept the claim. By way of logic, you're either theistic or atheisitc. There's no middle ground or "neither". If you answer yes to claim 1, you're a theist. Any other answer places you as an atheist. Not accepting the claim doesn't mean you accept claim 2:

2. there is no god.

That is a seperate claim entirely. Hope I cleared things up.

File: Accidental+learning+_6e1fafcd37c455608f78c6f66a1e923b.jpg (12KB, 287x200px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 287x200px

>>34092382
Yeparooni

The tao that can be named is not the true tao.

I'm flirting with Christianity right now after about 7 years of being atheist (started at 13). Mainly attracted to the values, aesthetic, and community while yearning for the transcendental

>>34092557
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4_WKlttKRDw

Coulda just linked him to this video.

File: lee-kent-angel-in-the-war-2-by-leekent-d8kvrwz.jpg (300KB, 1276x1920px) Image search: [Google]

300KB, 1276x1920px

>>34086985
also I'd encourage you to look into Taoism. it's pretty based and it's compatible with most systems of belief

File: 1480961945644.jpg (99KB, 540x376px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 540x376px

>>34092628
thanks broseph, well put. I like teacching people things though, unlike the rest of 4chainz that just mocks.

>>34092647
I sure will desu, I'm always keen to learn more. Can I get cliffnotes/greentext on what its about?

>>34092557
>By way of logic, you're either theistic or atheisitc
I disagree. There is not a dichotomy of belief there.
There is a middle ground. The existence of God and the non-existence of God are to me equally possible but I cannot know. Calling me an agnostic atheist implies that I don't believe in a god and at the same time that the existence of god is unknowable. It's not either or with belief.

File: 6222724-Jar-Half-Full-of-Coins-Isolated-on-a-White-Background-Stock-Photo.jpg (104KB, 863x1300px) Image search: [Google]

104KB, 863x1300px

>>34093044
>The existence of God and the non-existence of God are to me equally possible but I cannot know
Your bring claim 2 back into the equation. That position you're describing is still an atheistic position.


Let's try it this way.

1. There is a god

We're dealing with this claim ONLY. Do you accept it?

File: 12751534_1719698578263746_1322177487_n.jpg (76KB, 480x480px) Image search: [Google]

76KB, 480x480px

>>34092816
from the Tao Te Ching

>When I let go of what I am, I become what I might be.

>Those who know do not speak. Those who speak do not know.

>The truth is not always beautiful, nor are beautiful words the truth.

>If you try to change it, you will ruin it. Try to hold it, and you will lose it.

>To conquer others is strength. To conquer yourself is true power.

>Trying to understand is like straining through muddy water. Have the patience to wait. Be still and allow the mud to settle.

>He who stands on tiptoe doesn't stand firm. He who rushes ahead doesn't go far. He who tries to shine dims his own light. He who defines himself can't know who he really is. He who has power over others can't empower himself. he who clings to his work will create nothing that endures. If you want to accord with the Tao, just do your job, then let go.

>>34093186
>1. There is a god

>We're dealing with this claim ONLY. Do you accept it?

That claim is unknown.

>>34092816
>>34093280

follow up to that:

the (extremely) short version is that it's a set of principles meant to allow you to live in harmony with the flow of the universe

I am god
AMA

>>34093301
I'm not asking whether it's true or not. I'm asking whether you believe it to be true.

File: artworks-000186819711-yzlxzh-t500x500.jpg (82KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

82KB, 500x500px

>>34093337
>claims to be god
>no digits

>>34093362
I know but you're not gonna force me into a dichotomy of belief there. I can neither justify the belief in god nor the belief in no-god.

File: 1473322751918.png (151KB, 672x492px) Image search: [Google]

151KB, 672x492px

>>34092816
Basically all you need to know.

>>34093186
>>34093444

have you two fuckers even bothered to define "God" in the sense that you're talking?

>>34093444
It's not a yes/no question, there is no dichotomy. "I don't know" or "im not sure" would have also sufficed. But you've given enough information anyway. If your answer isn't yes you're an atheist.

>>34093528
Because you haven't accepted the claim.

File: xXuNC.jpg (735KB, 1000x6000px) Image search: [Google]

735KB, 1000x6000px

>>34093444
Trips checked.

Look at the word Atheist. It's a negation of the word theist. It's liteally everything that isn't theist. There really is only two options. See pic related please.

>>34093528
I told you that I didn't know whether God exists or not and therefore I am an agnostic.

>>34093809
>I really don't care in the middle of the graph
Apatheism is not agnosticism

>>34093812
gnosticism = knowledge

theism = belief

>I didn't know whether God exists

This has nothing to do with atheism. Gnosticism refers to what you KNOW. Atheism speaks to what you BELIEVE. Knowledge is a subset of belief.

We'll run through this one more time.

1. there is a god.

Do you BELIEVE this to be true? It doesn't matter whether you claim knowledge or not. If your answer is anything except yes, you're an atheist.

File: agnostic1.png (106KB, 550x347px) Image search: [Google]

106KB, 550x347px

>>34093971
I don't BELIEVE either way.

I don't KNOW if god exists or not.

>>34094062
>I don't BELIEVE either way.
Then you haven't accepted the god claim. You're atheist.

>I don't KNOW if god exists or not.
And agnostic.

I'll place the statements again:

1. there is a god
2. there is no god

You said you "don't believe either way". The "either way" doesn't matter because we're only dealing with claim 1. You don't believe claim 1. You're atheist.

QED

You're free to still reject claim 2.

>>34094062
Theist = I believe god exists

Atheist = literally everything else

>>34087137
Not exactly, if you believe that there's no god it's atheism. If you say you can't know it and admit that either there can be god, or he's not there, you're an agnostic

>>34094276
I accept neither claim of Atheism or Theism so I can't be a strong theist or a weak atheist or a weak theist or a strong atheist.


I do not BELIEVE in the existence or non-existence of god.


I find that we cannot KNOW whether god exists or not.

Call me an Atheist again. Come on.

>>34094356
>I do not BELIEVE in the existence or non-existence of god.
>When you're so far up your own ass being a contrarian you can't into logic.

>>34094311
THanks for explaining this in an easy way.

>>34094356
Atheism isn't a claim, it's a response to a claim. Atheism makes no claims.

>I do not BELIEVE in the existence or non-existence of god.
And here lies the confusion that you keep misunderstanding. Atheism has NOTHING to do with the "non-existence" of god yet you keep bringing it up.

1. there is a god

That's the ONLY claim we're dealing with. You said you do not believe in the existence or non existence of god.

Here's the two statements.

1. there is a god
2. there is no god

I'll quote you:

>I do not BELIEVE in the existence or non-existence of god.

You reject both statements. It doesn't matter what you think of the second claim, you haven't accepted the first. You're atheist.

>>34094356

You're an atheist

>>34094468
The existence and non-existence of god are equally equivocable. That is my belief. Why you are calling me an atheist after all this I cannot explain.

I HAVEN'T ACCEPTED NOR DENOUNCED YOUR FIRST CLAIM SO YOU CANNOT CALL ME AN ATHEIST NOR A THEIST

>>34094597
>I HAVEN'T ACCEPTED
You're atheist. You don't have to denounce it. That would speak to the second claim.

>>34094631
You aren't listening. I have NEITHER ACCEPTED NOR DENOUNCED YOUR FIRST claim. Neither. Neither.

>>34094597
>The existence and non-existence of god are equally equivocable.

Again, you bring up non-existence we aren't dealing with that. What you stated describes a possible atheistic position.

1. there is a god
2. there is no god

Keep your eyes on claim 1.

>I HAVEN'T ACCEPTED NOR DENOUNCED YOUR FIRST CLAIM
>I HAVEN'T ACCEPTED

You're atheist. And until you accept the first claim you're atheist.

>>34094686
Yes, and as long as you don't accept claim 1 you're atheist. It doesn't matter whether you denounce it or not.

>>34094705
I disagree because my belief is that we cannot know. Try again. Just because I accept neither claim, that doesn't make me an atheist.

>>34094779
Not him but you are fucking retarded. Let me guess you're an american who thinks that being an atheist means being an edgy teenager who hates his parents for making him go to church and you don't want the stigma.
If you don't explicitly believe 100% in the definite existence of god(s) then you are atheist. Even if you believe there is "probably" a god then you're still an atheist. The only way to not be atheist is to completely believe in a god without doubt.

>>34094779
>I disagree because my belief is that we cannot know
c'mon, we already discussed this. We aren't dealing with what you KNOW, we're dealing with BELIEF. Knowledge is a subset of belief. You can believe something without knowing it.

>Just because I accept neither claim, that doesn't make me an atheist

Forget about "neither" we're dealing with 1 claim. Keep your eyes on claim 1 alone. Not accepting claim 1 doesn't mean you accept claim two.

1. there is a god
2. there is no god

As long as you don't accept claim 1 you're atheist. >>34094311 put it really well.

>>34094927
I have told you time and time again what I belief you just don't want to listen.

>>34094905
Nice strawman. Everyone who doesn't 100% believe in the existence of god is an atheist. Stupidest thing I read this year.

>>34094984
Okay now I know you're either trolling or you really are a stupid yank.

>>34086985
Stockholm syndrome. The truth yo.

>>34094984
I've listened and what you're describing is atheism.

As far as I understand this is what you believe:

>The existence and non-existence of god are equally equivocable

That is atheism honey, you haven't accepted claim 1. That's actually a pretty common atheist stance. It's nothing special.

>>34087208
All agnostics are atheists famicom.

>>34095042
Atheism is the rejection of belief in deities which doesn't apply to me. Not all agnostics are atheists.

>>34086985
I read VALIS and decided to write my own exegesis and convince myself to believe it
>going on 4 journals filled with gibberish so far

File: ffs.png (23KB, 960x720px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 960x720px

>>34095042
>>The existence and non-existence of god are equally equivocable

>That is atheism honey, you haven't accepted claim 1. That's actually a pretty common atheist stance. It's nothing special

You are trolling. FFS you gotta be kidding me. Refer to this chart.

>>34095082
this guy: >>34095069
is not me. I disagree with him. Agnostic theists exist.

>Atheism is the rejection of belief in deities which doesn't apply to me
Not neccesarily, that's one subsection of atheism. Atheism is a negation of the word theist. As long as you aren't a theist you're an atheist.

1. there is a god
2. there is no god

As long as you don't accept claim 1, you're atheist. It doesn't exclude the possiblity of a god existing as claim 2 hasn't been touched yet.

What you're describing is agnostic atheism.

>>34095269
No it's not because agnostic atheism implies

1. The rejection of a belief in God
2. <100% certainty of this knowledge.

Doesn't apply to me.

>>34095328
>1. The rejection of a belief in God
That's hard atheism. Broad atheism is everything that isn't theism. You're an implicit atheist as well as agnostic i.e. what most non-religious people are. Your position isn't unique in the slightest.

>>34086985
I'm pantheist. The Universe IS God. Ultimately, reality is a giant, absurd quantum fluctuation and consciousness is just some of the ripples of this fluctuation. So I do believe in an afterlife, a tiny, peaceful low level consciousness after death. Used to be an atheist but I think a thing as complex as the Universe or Multiverse can be classed as a God, and certainly have Godlike beings within it.

Thanks for the thread OP, got to read someone spend hours trying to explain the difference between atheism and theism to some idiot nonce. Good shit.

>Was born and baptized into hardcore Lutheranism
>When it became too expensive for parents to keep paying for private Christian schooling, was put into public school
>became an atheist at ~14ish
>In the the never ending process of disproving all of Christianity's lies and learning truths to explain reality, start glossing over atomic science
>start realizing it makes too much sense
>start noticing that this is not random
>start noticing logical engineering in all things
>suddenly have a revelation that "trees don't have brains" yet they know detailed stuff about the environment and other organisms
>find "god"

Did not convert to an organized school of beliefs but I stopped being an atheist.

>>34087137
what is agnostic

>>34094335
Atheism and agnosticism aren't mutually exclusive, you fucking idiot.

>>34096108
you can break down the word to decipher its meaning. a- (not) gnosis (knowledge). Literally "not knowing".

/nerd

>>34096108
see: >34093971

>>34096108
fixed it >>34093971

origisenpaidesufam

>>34093971
>theism = belief
>Atheism speaks to what you BELIEVE.
This is quite wrong. Another way to say theism would be "god-following". Theos (God) -ism (following/philosophy).

>>34096389
False, you could believe in a god and choose not to follow it. e.g satan would be a theist even though he does not follow jehovah ( not that i believe any of that to be true)

File: Capture.gif (15KB, 849x435px) Image search: [Google]

15KB, 849x435px

>>34096463
Or you could just look up the etymology yourself if you fancy.

>>34096658
etymology =/= definition

>>34094356
You're an atheist you stupid fuckhead.

>>34091185
>>34091350
You guys are only familiar with evangelical "theology" (i.e. lack of theology). Yes most Western Christians (70% of US claims to be Christian) will define Christianity as "living a good life such that God owes you entry into heaven." That's a works-based righteousness and is Anti-Christian. Well it's Anti-Protestant Christianity at least and the main dividing line between Protestantism and Roman Catholicism.

Anyways, here's Christianity. Man is born in sin and sin corrupts every facet of his being. Now that's not saying everything he does is entirely evil, but rather everything he does has some evil in it, and this amount of evil varies per person. Overall the Bible tells us that every man has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God (Romans 3:23). And while God does forgive many for their sinful rebellion and forgive them, He does not leave the guilty unpunished (Exodus 34:7).

But this is a conundrum that needs to be solved. How can God be just to forgive the sins of any when all have sinned? He could have just thrown everyone into hell and still be just. How can He be just in allowing people into heaven when they've committed crime(s) against Him?

Read on in Romans 3 past verse 23. Christ died as a propitiation for the sins of those who would believe. God doesn't just arbitrarily wave your crimes away. If a judge just said "I'm kind and nice so I'm not going to send this murderer to jail" he would be a corrupt judge. There is a price that needs to be paid. This is especially when the Creator of the universe is the offended one.

Christ's life and death paid that price for those who would believe in Him and His work, namely that His perfect following of the law satisfied the demands of God for all of us to be perfect. This is how He is a sacrifice for us. He offers his life in our stead and when He died on the cross God was satisfied for the sins of those who did/were/were going to believe.

(1/2) Shorter post coming up.

>>34097548

Now this doesn't mean the believer can just sin all over the place on Earth and still go to heaven. Christ is not only Savior but also Lord. God does punish on Earth as well if he decides to. Also a true Christian, while not perfect, would not be happy sinning since God hates sin. In the end, everyone will answer for every action they've done, the Bible tells us so. And on earth everyone might receive some form of temporary punishment for their sin.

However regarding eternal punishment, the believer will not receive it because Christ already paid that price on the cross, and the believer's faith in Christ's work is seen by God as righteousness in that regard. It's an undeserved gift hence "Amazing Grace." When God casts his eternal judgement, Christ's perfect life and death cover the believer despite them not having contributed anything to it.

File: inari 2.jpg (2MB, 3408x2272px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 3408x2272px

>>34086985
Well I don't think I can say that I "converted".

I was definitely an atheist when I was like 16. I thought I had the whole world figured out and that religion was nothing but a stupid old dinosaur used to manipulate people. At the very least the religion I was raised in.

Then I started studying other religions on my own. We briefly, and I mean B-R-I-E-F-L-Y looked at "world religions" in class one time but we really it was just Islam & Judaism. I looked into Hinduism, Buddhism, Sikh, Wicca, paganism, Satanism, etc.


Buddhism definitely struck a chord with me.


The age-old question of "why do bad things happen" was answered honestly and rationally for once. Bad things happen in life for no reason, you just need to deal with it, and here's a way to deal with it.

The core philosophy of suffering being born out of attachment/desire and lack of empathy also struck a chord. I was miserable and surrounded by miserable people most of my life at that point exactly because of those reasons.


So I started studying Buddhism more and more and at one point I did consider myself a full-blown Buddhist.

But, eh, not really. If you asked me what kind of Buddhist I was I couldn't fucking tell you. Yellow hat or Red hat, Theravada or Vajrayana, whatever man it's just another hassle to deal with.


I stick with Zen Buddhism the most because it's the most simple and the one that is less about mysticism and more about philosophy.

>>34088228
> t. still a faggot that's scared to talk about death

>>34086985
I'm still an atheist right now but I have an increasing interest in paganism/pagan traditions and the occult lately. I think I'll still remain technically an atheist in that I don't believe in a higher power, but I have an urge to live more like my ancestors. The biggest thing holding me back is being afraid that some skinhead Odinist or Wiccan LARPer will try to tell me I'm a poser or I'm not "doing it right".

File: 1461353698171.jpg (19KB, 277x400px) Image search: [Google]

19KB, 277x400px

>>34087671
>being ALIVE AND ACTIVE and on drugs is the same as being DEAD

It wasn't through a typical petty means of conversion, be it fear of death, boredom with materialism, or what have you, but rather due to my studiousness in fields of both the physical and metaphysical.

To spare the essay, I came to the conclusion that every materialist I idolized really has no fucking clue what's going on, the physical sciences aren't even close to answering any sort of existential question either. The commitment to materialism, in every case, is rooted in a personal, emotional opposition to non-materialist ideas. A lot of theists realize this too, but lack the IQ to express it, so it usually manifests as "U JUST HATE GAWD".

I also had to assess God differently, the way many modern apologists and theists view God isn't even a modicum of the understanding that the Church fathers 1500 years ago had towards God, the cosmos, and theology. To find this new understanding required me to depart the modern western tradition and explore ideas from the east, which brought me back to the west, where I dissected many western occult, religious, and philosophical traditions. This led me to having a fuller understanding of God, and of Christian theology. The more I progress in my study, the more I shy away from metaphysical relativism and more towards objectivism: to seeing the the legitimacy of the Christian (orthodox or catholic) faith above all others.

That was the bulk of the heady venture into the subject, then there was also the fact that I engaged in just about all things materialists and moral relativists say are perfectly fine, healthy behaviors (think: masturbation, faggotry, drug use, etc.) and they've not only tremendously negatively impacted me, but also gnawed at my conscience, even before I suspected any of them could be wrong (odd way to word it, I know). So, could I call myself a Christian today? I'm still not all too sure, but I am definitely a theist.

File: IMG_4647.jpg (203KB, 900x1146px) Image search: [Google]

203KB, 900x1146px

I decided to become a buddhist when I realized that I have to take it seriously. I've read many books about buddhism and tried to meditate every day but I still thought of it as an interest and didn't really try to live according to the precepts and follow the eightfold path. I ecen started to write with a teacher from the local buddhist center and will join the sangha with the next semester.
I always believed that what buddhism has to offer is true and ut never took much of a leap of faith to try and realky plunge myself into it.
I used "forget" the rukes and was realky quick to anger but I have much more self control now. I am curious where will this lead and am very amxious about going to the center but I don't think it is possible without it
sorry for blog

>>34099694
Buddhism was my starting point too, I'd say. It has many useful tools to use in life and spiritual development, but it only teaches you how to overcome suffering.

>>34099755
>Buddhism was my starting point too
where did you end up? I try to read more about philosophies like stoicism and even read some books about existentialism from Sartre and Camus but I am interested where will buddhism take me in life and I can't commit to certain philosophies like I can to buddhism

>but it only teaches you how to overcome suffering.
>only
what more do you want from life than to nit suffer while living? also buddhism deals with after life as well and fear of death and I can't see what more can you want from religion to give tham that